Senator vows to delay Obama's nominees over lack of answers on Benghazi attack

Comments

In a government with a two party system it is the job of the out-of-power party
to question everything, hold up everything, and second-guess everything that the
party-in-power is doing, especially when it comes to national security, the
death of American citizens, and the nomination of powerful non-elected
officials. This is part of the checks and balances we brag about so often. It
is no surprise to me that the Republicans have had to resort to using the
tactics they use when there is absolutely no respect from leftists for those
with conservative thought. We have seen absolutely no fiscal responsibility
from the White House in four years, so of course the Republicans are going to
use things the Presidency has to have, such as debt extensions, to try and force
some responsibility. There has been no disclosure over Benghazi, and the
democrats have been able to sweep it under the rug, so of course the Republicans
are going to use the nomination of important officials to get some answers. The
Democrats would do the same thing if the roles were reversed.

WhateverSpringville, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 12:01 p.m.

Once again the Faux news automatons show their true colors. 12 embassy attacks
and 53 deaths under Bush and not one word from the astroturf tea party because
their AM radio masters never told them that they could be upset about it, just
when it happens under Obama. Pathetic.

Tolstoysalt lake, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 11:28 a.m.

@Mountainman

This stoped being about the ragic loss of life a long
ago, it is disgraceful that graham has turned this into nothing more then
political circus.

one old manOgden, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 11:10 a.m.

In the meantime, our own Jason Chafetz bragged about cutting funding for embassy
security. Many of his GOP colleagues were equally proud of their fiscally
"responsible" decision.

Now they have to distract the
gullible from noticing that embarrassing fact.

MountanmanHayden, ID

Feb. 11, 2013 10:44 a.m.

No Tolstoy you have it backwards. Its all about the left protecting Obama and
not holding him accountable for his malfeasance. How dare the mean, nasty
Republicans ask him (or Hillary) questions? How dare they!

Tolstoysalt lake, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 10:18 a.m.

@lostI think it's good that you have finally started o admit your
true intentions. Your only interest is in destroying President Obama no matter
the cost and now how much you exploit others tragic deaths.

JWBKaysville, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 9:17 a.m.

The military has a strong and trained force. Their personnel aren't given
the same protection civilians, due to the military requirements. However,
military officers don't provide the same protection for their civilian
counterparts working for the Department of Defense. Men and women in the
military are given respirators or gas masks and atropine to defend themselves
against chemical weapon attacks on our military personnel. However, these
officers have said that civilians working in a chemical weapon agent limited
area don't need the same type of protection and that it is not part of
their principal duty to use a gas mask and have on their person the nerve agent
antidote kit. The military has plenty of good and trustworthy people in their
forces, but they are not all perfect in their performance of their duties.

When Ms. Clinton highlights so many places that had problems that day
she doesn't mention that this was the only place with CIA direct ground
involvement. She minces words and intent. She states that they received so
many e-mails that one stating Benghazi as a imminent danger to our personnel
wasn't important to react to. People are valuable asset.

JWBKaysville, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 8:38 a.m.

This may be a Democrat issue but the military doesn't have political sides,
even though the Secretary of Defense is more than political in his appointment
and mandate to decimate the military in his short term. He has been a
bureaucrat and a political appointee for many generations. I now even question
his time as the head of the CIA since the CIA had direct involvement in this
Benghazi incident and with the CIA-director sort of second fiddle. This was due
to his own problems and this SECDEF able to sway with the President on both the
CIA and DoD involvement, or lack thereof. You would think there would have been
more involvement, not less from the CIA. Watching the Secretaries of Defense
and State testify, hedging and diversionary tactics were played on their parts.
Ms. Clinton has plenty of ability in dealing with a husband that always tells
the truth and knows what "is" is. She may have taken full
responsibility for this incident but now we have the longboatman in charge. May
the swift people will be able to tell when the truth is being spoken. Military
Generals are the closest to political in appointments.

lost in DCWest Jordan, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 8:33 a.m.

Pagan,stopping BO IS accomplishing something - it is the most important
work they can do.

you are correct, MM. the highly partisan dems and
their lap-dog media are more concerned about protecting hillary for 2016 than
they were about our people in Bengazi

Susan Roylance

Feb. 11, 2013 8:24 a.m.

One of the main purposes of our government is to protect the citizens of the
United States of American. While every life is valuable, those who are
willing to put their life on the line in dangerous locations should have every
reason to believe that the government will use resources to protect them. At
the very least, we should know that the government cares about their safety. I
hope the investigation into the tragedy in Libya will wake up the CIA and
Defense Department leaders to the seriousness of their duty to be "on
call" in times of need -- when lives are in danger.

MountanmanHayden, ID

Feb. 11, 2013 5:34 a.m.

It is very interesting to me the lack of interest the Democrats have in this
Benghazi (add parenthetically fast and furious and white house intelligent
leaks) debacle. I remember when the Watergate scandal broke, they were VERY
interested and there were hearings for months, even though no one died! It was
on the front page of every newspaper in America and the front story of every
news broadcast, even though no one died. A president resigned in disgrace and it
was promoted as the "crime of the century", even though no one died! Now
we have another scandal that brings hypocritical yawns from partisan Democrats.
One has to believe the only differences is this time THEIR guys are involved and
of course, people died! Will anything happen to those in the government who were
at least very incompetent if not criminal in their involvement? No, because when
its Democrats with their hands dirty, its not "important"!

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Feb. 11, 2013 12:05 a.m.

WASHINGTON — A leading Republican senator said Sunday he would hold up
Senate confirmation of...' - Article

I don't need to read
anymore.

Gone are the days the GOP accomplished anything.

HutteriteAmerican Fork, UT

Feb. 10, 2013 10:53 p.m.

Please, senator, can't you just hold your breath instead? I'm not sure
where the answers all got put that, surely, you sought after finding out about
the warnings prior to the September 11 attacks but I'm sure they're
out there. In due course you will get answers about the Benghazi attack as well
but, like then, you shouldn't hold up the business of the nation for it. Or
do you have different motives?